Why do the Navy Seals, FBI, Secret Service, Air Marshals, DHS, Treasury, el al not use Glocks? Because they all chose Sigs. Just learn to live with the fact that Glock is not the answer to "What would be the best pistol to choose if you want the best possible option." Glock is a good pistol and is the best choice for many, just not the choice for the best of the best.

Why do the Navy Seals, FBI, Secret Service, Air Marshals, DHS, Treasury, el al not use Glocks? Because they all chose Sigs. Just learn to live with the fact that Glock is not the answer to "What would be the best pistol to choose if you want the best possible option." Glock is a good pistol and is the best choice for many, just not the choice for the best of the best.

Seals indeed carry Sigs. Delta Force currently uses Glocks. Sigs are being phased out in the FBI, replaced by Glocks. FBI SWAT and HRT carry either well-smith'd 1911s or Glocks. The Secret Service carry Sigs, as do FAMS. I wouldn't call DHS "best of the best" of anything, so that's an odd inclusion which makes it look like you are cherry-picking examples. The U.S. Marshalls carry Glocks, as do quite a few SPECOPS and SF units of the U.S. Military.

A quick check reveals many "best of the best" agencies - both national and international - which issue Glocks. Your case fails on its merits.

Unless you have personal knowledge, you will not be able to confirm this. And if you had personal knowledge you would not, could not, or should not make any such claim. Also, both Navy Seals and Delta Force can use what they want within reason, so I'm sure some of both use Glocks but we know for sure the Seals mostly use Sigs.

__________________
Know the status of your weapon
Keep your muzzle oriented so that no one will be hurt if the firearm discharges
Keep your finger off the trigger until you have an adequate sight picture
Maintain situational awareness

Delta Force have reportedly been known to use the Glock 22, a full-size pistol chambered in .40 S&W. Delta have a history of preferring .45s such as the venerable 1911, however it's rumored that some operators switched to Glock 22s as they were deemed more reliable in the sandy conditions the unit tends to operate in these days.

No clue who or what they were, but once upn a time, I saw a group of guys walking around the FOB carrying assorted rifles(even an M-14!) and wearing Sigs, Berettas, Glocks,a nd maybe a 1911. They were wearing Northface jackets and the old DCUs, no clue who they were, but as preiously stated, norma procurement and normale MTOE obviously didn't apply to them.

__________________
NRA Life Member
Ladyfriend: "I need help with the leaves in the yard"
Me: "Controlled burn?"
LadyFriend: "I forgot my Boy Scout turned into an infantry officer."

I just ordered some today and dealer is the same as a standard black version- for those who are into US Spec Ops history a FDE 3rd Gen G22 was specified and purchased by an elite US Army special missions unit- up until now they were the only FDE Glocks ever made

Based on that and the desirability of the OD Green frame Glocks now it would be a wise move to get at least one while they last

I have one each G17 and G22 in Gen 3 and 4 on the way

Be safe

LAV

Quote:

As far as why 40 Glock over the 45 ACP G21 my guess would be magazine capacity and overall size of the gun as two main reasons -the G22 is much easier to manage than a G21 which is a big pistol- why they chose 40 over 9mm your guess is as good as mine; I didn't agree with it then and I don't agree with it now

Glad there was so much interesting response, thanks. However, trying to direct this thread back to my original question.

What I was trying to get to the bottom of was, in a nutshell: Why do the military (and also some fed agencies) seemingly distrust the "striker fired / no external safeties" approach while the same works so well for hundreds of police departments?

What I wanted to aim at was whether it has to do with the different role of a LEO handgun compared to a military sidearm.

I've always wondered that too. I've often suspecte the reason that some agencies use the Glock versuses others is related to a variety of factors including agency size, types of personnel in the agency, and time spent devoted to firearms training.

For instance, it makes since that the Border Patrol would issue Berettas and HKs because I can believe they devote more time to firearms training whereas the FBI has a whole of sworn gun toting agents that might never ue thier piece in the field and as such, can get by with the lowest, cheapest common denominator, such as a Glock.

__________________
NRA Life Member
Ladyfriend: "I need help with the leaves in the yard"
Me: "Controlled burn?"
LadyFriend: "I forgot my Boy Scout turned into an infantry officer."

What I was trying to get to the bottom of was, in a nutshell: Why do the military (and also some fed agencies) seemingly distrust the "striker fired / no external safeties" approach while the same works so well for hundreds of police departments?

I'm not fully sure that such is the case. Even some PDs manage to issue contract proposals that may specify hammer fired guns or are ultimately written to give extreme preference to what the PD was wanting to buy anyway (but they have to have a "competition" even if it's just in name only). It seems more to me that the hammer vs. striker argument is a red herring. So long as the primer ignites, why would one care what gun A uses vis a vis gun B? There's advantages and drawbacks to both ways.

The most direct answer to the question posed in your thread title has pretty well been answered- it was not part of the original competition and since then there has not been shown to be enough of a benefit (vs. the costs involved) to justify reopening the issue.

As for what so and so unit/department uses and why, I think gun enthusiasts tend to get WAY too wrapped up in it. I don't really care if no elite unit uses what I have on my hip... I chose my own gun with an eye toward criteria that matter to me... criteria that do not apply to people kicking doors in non permissive environments. They did the same when they chose their sidearms, and they did so using criteria that don't apply to an overweight desk sitter in middle America.

The fact that he said "no comment" rather than saying, they aren't used by Delta Force lends as much credence to their being used as not being used.

No, actually that doesn't match my own experience with OPSEC. Usually the standing rule is to decline to comment whether it is in use or not. Knowledge of not using something can be just as compromising as knowledge of using something. Declining to comment as a matter of course just helps keep people guessing, not to mention working as great misdirection.

I'm not doubting that Delta might use Glocks. But that comment from Vickers means nothing.

__________________
Know the status of your weapon
Keep your muzzle oriented so that no one will be hurt if the firearm discharges
Keep your finger off the trigger until you have an adequate sight picture
Maintain situational awareness

I think we can safely safe that some "operators" choose to use Glocks but I doubt Delta Force has some uniform issue of firearms and while the official pistol of the Seals is the Sig I'm sure some are given permission to use Glocks as well. The description above of the unknown operators having a number of different pistols is probably accurate of what is actully happening at the top of the food chain. For some, the Glock will be the best choice, while others will step up to Sig, HK, 1911, etc. These customized for rough usage 1911s and CZs make sense: http://www.customwinslow.com/#/home

For instance, it makes since that the Border Patrol would issue Berettas and HKs because I can believe they devote more time to firearms training whereas the FBI ...

It might make sense except it doesn't hold up to even minimal scrutiny. FBI pistol training standards are more stringent than USBPS. What you (want to) believe does not enter into the equation.

I'd like to be clear that I am not a Glock fanboi. They aren't even my favorite guns. However, it staggers the imagination to call Glocks "lowest common denominator" ... just doesn't make sense given their popularity with a whole range of people who have sufficient experience to know better, and who get to choose whatever they want.

More to the point of the OP: The US military has an ongoing love affair with manual safeties, DA/SA triggers and hammer-fired pistols. This probably has more to do with tradition and misguided notions of safety than anything else. You won't see a hammer-fired Glock with a manual safety and a true DA-style 11lb first pull anywhere in your future ... so they are out of the running until the brass recognizes that the current standards are wacky.

Why do the military (and also some fed agencies) seemingly distrust the "striker fired / no external safeties" approach while the same works so well for hundreds of police departments?

I don't think it has anything to do with "distrust".

I think it has everything to do with the fact that the military already owns hundreds of thousands of M9s that do the job required of them, and there is no feasible economic, performance, or training-related reason to replace them with a striker-fired (or any other) design.

What I was trying to get to the bottom of was, in a nutshell: Why do the military (and also some fed agencies) seemingly distrust the "striker fired / no external safeties" approach while the same works so well for hundreds of police departments?

I don’t know that the Fed's avoid them specifically for being striker fired without safeties, but in general the question could be looked at in reverse...
"Why do so many police departments use the Glock when our military has largely steered clear of them?"

In short, a huge number of officers pay for their own pistols. The Glocks are very cost-effective and police departments don’t seem swayed by the "Buy American" concept, whereas the Fed's try to where its suitable.

This email link is to reach site administrators for assistance, if you cannot access TFL via other means. If you are a TFL member and can access TFL, please do not use this link; instead, use the forums (like Questions, Suggestions, and Tech Support) or PM an appropriate mod or admin.

If you are experiencing difficulties posting in the Buy/Sell/Trade subforums of TFL, please read the "sticky" announcement threads at the top of the applicable subforum. If you still feel you are qualified to post in those subforums, please contact "Shane Tuttle" (the mod for that portion of TFL) via Private Message for assistance.

This email contact address is not an "Ask the Firearms Expert" service. Such emails will be ignored. If you have a firearm related question, please register and post it on the forums.